Move linux/darwin binaries into cache/binaries folder (#21179) #21664

henry3260 · 2025-09-29T11:35:44Z

This PR addresses issue #21179 by reorganizing the cache folder structure for binaries.

Before

Binaries for Linux and Darwin were placed directly under:
- ~/.minikube/cache/linux
- ~/.minikube/cache/darwin

After

They are now moved into a dedicated binaries subfolder:
- ~/.minikube/cache/binaries/linux
- ~/.minikube/cache/binaries/darwin

Why

This improves organization of the cache directory.
Aligns binaries with how other cached items (e.g., images, ISO files) are stored.
No functional behavior is changed, only the storage path for binaries.

Fixes #21179

Screenshot (Before)

Screenshot (After)

k8s-ci-robot · 2025-09-29T11:35:55Z

Hi @henry3260. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

minikube-bot · 2025-09-29T11:39:03Z

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

nirs · 2025-09-29T11:49:32Z

pkg/minikube/download/binary.go

 func Binary(binary, version, osName, archName, binaryURL string) (string, error) {
-	targetDir := localpath.MakeMiniPath("cache", osName, archName, version)
+	// targetDir := localpath.MakeMiniPath("cache", osName, archName, version)
+	targetDir := localpath.MakeMiniPath("cache", "binaries", osName, archName, version)


I think we should use "bin", it is more consistent with ~/.minikube/bin and the rest of the world.

We are using "binaries" internally which would nice to change also to bin but it may be harder since we may code using it. Since this cache directory is new we don't have backward compatibility concerns.

I think we should use "bin", it is more consistent with ~/.minikube/bin and the rest of the world.

We are using "binaries" internally which would nice to change also to bin but it may be harder since we may code using it. Since this cache directory is new we don't have backward compatibility concerns.

Thanks for the suggestion! That makes sense, I’ll update it to use bin for consistency.

nirs · 2025-09-29T13:39:28Z

/lgtm

nirs · 2025-09-29T13:40:19Z

/assign @medyagh

nirs · 2025-10-02T23:20:53Z

pkg/minikube/download/download_test.go

+
+	// check that the bin directory was created
+	targetDir := filepath.Join(
+		os.Getenv("HOME"), ".minikube", "cache", "bin", "linux", "amd64", "v1.31.0",


~/.minikube is the default, but if MINIKUBE_HOME is defined it will be used. There is a helper function to return the right path (but I don't remember the function name). Check what other tests are doing.

nirs · 2025-10-03T14:22:42Z

pkg/minikube/download/download_test.go

 	// check that the bin directory was created
 	targetDir := filepath.Join(
-		os.Getenv("HOME"), ".minikube", "cache", "bin", "linux", "amd64", "v1.31.0",
+		localpath.MiniPath(), "cache", "bin", "linux", "amd64", "v1.31.0",


Looks good, to make it even better squash this commit into the first one. Having this in git history is not helpful.

nirs · 2025-10-03T14:51:26Z

/lgtm

nirs · 2025-10-03T14:59:29Z

/lgtm

k8s-ci-robot · 2025-10-03T14:59:37Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: henry3260, nirs
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from medyagh. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

medyagh · 2025-10-17T18:36:09Z

/ok-to-test

medyagh

thanks for the PR, please update the before/after (it seems to be outdated)

k8s-ci-robot · 2025-10-17T18:36:51Z

@henry3260: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-minikube-integration	`fca5789`	link	true	`/test pull-minikube-integration`

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

minikube-pr-bot · 2025-10-17T19:56:54Z

kvm2 driver with docker runtime

┌────────────────┬──────────┬────────────────────────┐
│    COMMAND     │ MINIKUBE │ MINIKUBE  ( PR 21664 ) │
├────────────────┼──────────┼────────────────────────┤
│ minikube start │ 43.3s    │ 43.5s                  │
│ enable ingress │ 16.0s    │ 16.1s                  │
└────────────────┴──────────┴────────────────────────┘

Times for minikube ingress: 15.3s 15.3s 16.4s 15.8s 17.4s
Times for minikube (PR 21664) ingress: 16.9s 16.3s 15.3s 16.3s 15.9s

Times for minikube start: 45.8s 43.6s 42.4s 42.7s 42.0s
Times for minikube (PR 21664) start: 46.1s 41.4s 44.7s 43.5s 41.6s

docker driver with docker runtime

┌────────────────┬──────────┬────────────────────────┐
│    COMMAND     │ MINIKUBE │ MINIKUBE  ( PR 21664 ) │
├────────────────┼──────────┼────────────────────────┤
│ minikube start │ 23.3s    │ 23.8s                  │
│ enable ingress │ 11.1s    │ 11.9s                  │
└────────────────┴──────────┴────────────────────────┘

Times for minikube start: 23.3s 23.0s 23.5s 22.5s 24.4s
Times for minikube (PR 21664) start: 27.2s 22.1s 22.0s 25.3s 22.4s

Times for minikube ingress: 10.7s 10.6s 10.7s 12.6s 10.7s
Times for minikube (PR 21664) ingress: 11.7s 11.8s 11.7s 13.7s 10.7s

docker driver with containerd runtime

┌────────────────┬──────────┬────────────────────────┐
│    COMMAND     │ MINIKUBE │ MINIKUBE  ( PR 21664 ) │
├────────────────┼──────────┼────────────────────────┤
│ minikube start │ 20.9s    │ 20.5s                  │
│ enable ingress │ 21.5s    │ 21.3s                  │
└────────────────┴──────────┴────────────────────────┘

Times for minikube ingress: 21.1s 22.1s 22.1s 21.1s 21.1s
Times for minikube (PR 21664) ingress: 22.1s 20.2s 21.1s 22.2s 21.1s

Times for minikube start: 21.3s 20.2s 21.2s 20.7s 21.2s
Times for minikube (PR 21664) start: 20.2s 23.5s 19.4s 20.5s 19.0s

minikube-pr-bot · 2025-10-17T21:21:09Z

Here are the number of top 10 failed tests in each environments with lowest flake rate.

Environment	Test Name	Flake Rate
none_Linux (2 failed)	TestDownloadOnly/v1.28.0/binaries(gopogh)	Unknown
none_Linux (2 failed)	TestDownloadOnly/v1.34.1/binaries(gopogh)	Unknown
Docker_Linux (1 failed)	TestNetworkPlugins/group/kubenet/Start(gopogh)	0.00% (chart)
Docker_Windows (5 failed)	TestDownloadOnly/v1.28.0/kubectl(gopogh)	Unknown
Docker_Windows (5 failed)	TestDownloadOnly/v1.34.1/kubectl(gopogh)	Unknown
Docker_Windows (5 failed)	TestAddons/serial/Volcano(gopogh)	Unknown
Docker_Windows (5 failed)	TestErrorSpam/setup(gopogh)	Unknown
Docker_Windows (5 failed)	TestRunningBinaryUpgrade(gopogh)	Unknown

Besides the following environments also have failed tests:

KVM_Linux_crio: 2 failed (gopogh)
Docker_Linux_crio: 37 failed (gopogh)
Docker_Linux_crio_arm64: 39 failed (gopogh)

To see the flake rates of all tests by environment, click here.

henry3260 · 2025-10-19T12:37:28Z

thanks for the PR, please update the before/after (it seems to be outdated)

updated!

k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Sep 29, 2025

k8s-ci-robot requested review from nirs and prezha September 29, 2025 11:35

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Sep 29, 2025

k8s-ci-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Sep 29, 2025

nirs reviewed Sep 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

henry3260 force-pushed the feature/move-cache branch from d3e6101 to 2e7c8cf Compare September 29, 2025 12:29

henry3260 requested a review from nirs September 29, 2025 13:35

nirs approved these changes Sep 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot assigned nirs Sep 29, 2025

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 29, 2025

k8s-ci-robot assigned medyagh Sep 29, 2025

nirs reviewed Oct 2, 2025

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 3, 2025

nirs approved these changes Oct 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 3, 2025

Move linux/darwin binaries into cache/bin folder

fca5789

henry3260 force-pushed the feature/move-cache branch from aa3b2e4 to fca5789 Compare October 3, 2025 14:57

k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 3, 2025

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 3, 2025

k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Oct 17, 2025

medyagh requested changes Oct 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

Move linux/darwin binaries into cache/binaries folder (#21179) #21664

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Move linux/darwin binaries into cache/binaries folder (#21179) #21664

Conversation

henry3260 commented Sep 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Before

After

Why

Screenshot (Before)

Screenshot (After)

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Sep 29, 2025

Uh oh!

minikube-bot commented Sep 29, 2025

Uh oh!

nirs Sep 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

henry3260 Sep 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nirs commented Sep 29, 2025

Uh oh!

nirs commented Sep 29, 2025

Uh oh!

nirs Oct 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nirs Oct 3, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nirs commented Oct 3, 2025

Uh oh!

nirs commented Oct 3, 2025

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Oct 3, 2025

Uh oh!

medyagh commented Oct 17, 2025

Uh oh!

medyagh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Oct 17, 2025

Uh oh!

minikube-pr-bot commented Oct 17, 2025

Uh oh!

minikube-pr-bot commented Oct 17, 2025

Uh oh!

henry3260 commented Oct 19, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

henry3260 commented Sep 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading